Hey DP team!! IS actually can be turned off, but it has to be performed on-camera. IS-mode is hidden in the menu system, but I have the AF-L button programmed as a shortcut for IS-mode. Basically means the IS modes are one button click away, continuous-IS, shooting only-IS, easily toggled without taking your eye off the viewfinder. Ps I am an X-T3 user.
This might be the best travel zoom Fuji has. The OIS works great for low light slow shutter shots of still subjects. Build quality feels great. Very fast and silent AF. No complaints here.
I really appreciate your review and confirmation that I made the right choice by purchasing this lens in my X-T3 kit. I shoot a lot of stills and video on multi-day backpacking trips. While I prefer the weight and volume savings of a prime, I simply cannot sacrifice image stabilization. The 16-80mm, with its weather resistance, seemed an excellent hiking companion-and still does.
I own it and use it mostly for video work with my X-T3, and, as Jordan says, it's great for video, posssibly the most useful Fuji lens for videographers. By the way, the much glorified 18-55 is also soft in the corners, I did countless tests against comparable FF, APS-C and M43 lenses and I can assure you this is the case. Fuji sacrifices corner sharpness to compensate for distortion
the 12-100mm is one stop equivalent slower than the 16-80mm but it has a wider focal range and on a newer Olympus body you get much better stabilisation, (although I haven't checked the IS on the newer, fancier Fujis). I think 12-100mm on an OM-1 is a super tool for videos, very rugged, flexible, very stable. As for sharpness, I used them both and they are both more than sharp enough for video@@thomasanderson5929
Great and honest review as always. Planning on buying this lens for a long time, but after watching this video, i decided not too. Please continue to create great and honest review so potential buyers like me can make better buying decision.
@@niccollsvideo Some great new APS-C walkaround/travel/adventure lenses from Fuji and Sony. Will they force Canon to finally update its aging EF-S 17-55 f/2.8? Also, Chris, get in the holiday spirit and finally make Jordan a sandwich in the next video.
The 16-80 is insanely good!!! It’s primary good range is from around 20-75 mm... not that it’s bad in the whole range, but it’s a medium-range soon lens, so above expectations
I was actually looking to get this lens for travel, but I guess Ill stick with 18-55. Seriously, soft corners at wide end and softness does not go away even if you stop down, in year 2019????
I was contemplating the 16-80, while I have the 18-55, 12mm, 23 and 50mm primes. But it was indeed a great buy. Fits my XT4 perfectly. If in doubt.. Buy this.
Maybe I'm an outlier here, but in my family we always decorated the tree on Christmas eve and left it up until 12th night (Eve of Epiphany). So It's not strange to have trees up in January!
thanks... I traded off my 16-55 for this lens... and happy with the smaller size and IS... f4 has not been an issue for me... soft corners has never been an issue for me...
Dave thanks for your opinion. I know that for most professionals and enthusiasts pixel peeping isn't a thing when you print photos and these reviews always scare me when they put do much emphasis on corner sharpness at 100% +
I love your reviews. Sadly, despite all the wonderful work you've done recently, and your reviews really are fantastic, all.ove noticed is how good the Panasonic S1H is. Merry Christmas
They are two different things. Panasonic S1H cost four times as this Fuji. If I can buy the Panasonic S1H at the same price as Fuji yes, but at four time........
I personally "upgraded" from 16-80 to the 18-55. The lens is much smaller, lighter, faster, doesn't lose focus in video while zooming and just feels more balanced, it's also much nicer to bring or when travelling, you definitely feel the size difference. One thing to stress is F4 is full frame equivalent to F6, on the iPhone you now have F6.2 equiv, so the 16-80 is marginally better than an iPhone for many types of photography (e.g. indoors, low light, casual), for a comparatively much heavier lens than other options. Being able to get to F2.8 at 18mm on the 18-55 is literally double the light coming into the lens, it makes the difference between a blurry or noisy image in a restaurant, vs a really nice one. Sure 16mm is noticeably wider, but at the expense of flatter (and in my opinion cheaper) looking images and the extra 25mm on the zoom end really isn't much, it won't make it much more useful for sports or wildlife and with F4 it has limited portrait use (if you even want to be this far away at 80mm). For me, the 18-55 is a clear winner and I sold my 16-80.
you made the same comment on multiple videos. Lol. Anyways, I am trying to pick between 18.55 or 16.80. Which do you recommend after your experience? I am using for basic travel photos and want something for all occasions. Thank youy
@@michaelb9940 The 16-80 feels very bulky and big so I didn't like carrying it when travelling. It's not even just the fact the lens is much bigger and heavier than the 18-55, but also you get worse photos with it on the wide end if you ever go indoors or want to photograph in low light, or you just want to have that dramatic foreground/background separation / 3d pop that you really need F2.8 (or lower) for. Also from a tactile standpoint, the 16-80 is one of those lenses where the zoom feels "cheap", it creeps open under gravity alone (you can't use it on a tripod facing down say) and parts of the zoom range have more resistance than others - it just doesn't quite feel "special" like using other Fuji lenses. I am in Costa Del Sol (Spain) at the moment and took a day trip to Ronda, and actually really loved walking around with the Viltrox 13mm F1.4, despite also being a big lens. However, it's worth the weight as the photos you get out of it are very striking and unique. The photos I was getting from the 16-80 didn't look much better/different to my iPhone (and in low light much worse). I kept asking myself why am I bringing this big heavy, slow lens, until I sold it that is. It depends on what you're photographing though, lately, I've been bringing a 35mm F2 prime, 13mm Viltrox F1.4 for wide establishing shots and something like a 15-45mm zoom for daylight/vlogging/etc - it's so tiny! - If I want to photograph wildlife, I also bring my 50-230mm (I'm eyeing that 100-400 but it's so big and I'm not as into wildlife as other types of photography when I travel). Choosing between the 18-55 and 16-80 for me is an easy choice, the 18-55 is much better in my opinion as an allrounder - but if you want a travel lens, well, is it architecture and small winding European roads? - if so you want a wider focal length, maybe something like a 13mm Viltrox is much better. Or do you want to do street photography capturing specific parts of the scene, if so you may want to create some distance to your subject, the 35mm F2 is fantastic and discreet as it's a very tiny lens, etc.
@@DigiDriftZone bro THANK YOU so much. You know the funny thing is I’m actually buying to visit Ronda this summer 😂. I appreciate the feedback and after doing some research I too came to your conclusion on the 16-80. I’m now leaning for 35 and 23. But the 13mm looks good too. Thanks again and enjoy your travels mate
@@michaelb9940 Haha, small world! - It's an absolutely stunning part of the world and a nice wide angle is definitely worth having to capture the whole gorge. Also if you get a chance, visit Caminito Del Rey while you're here (book well in advance). It's another one of those breathtaking places where I really appreciated having the 13mm in my camera bag (and not having the extra weight of the 16-80!) :)
There appears to be a fairly wide sample variation with this lens. My copy is excellent, actually sold my 16mm f1.4 when I compared side by side. I think the wise thing to do would be to try and have a thorough test before adding to your arsenal.
Works well on our XT5. My wife loves the aperture markings that our 18-55 lacks. We crop a lot so the corner softness isn't really an issue, and there's always Topaz Sharp AI. Great travel lens
I think that the corner sharpness isn't much worse than most rivals but the heavy distortion correction will push it over the edge for most people. If you turn off the lens correction then the sharpness is actually not that bad (if the OIS hasn't ruined the picture).
Hey Chris, I agree with you in the most part, but one major issue I have found with this lens is long exposures! I shoot quite a lot of long exposures in my work and the lens will more often than not produce blurred images once you start using exposures of >30 seconds. This issue is so bad that I am returning it back to the shop today. My suspicion is the OIS, as you can’t physically turn it off, I’ve done tests with my 10-24 & 55-200 with OIS off and no problems!
I just had this issue. It was really frustrating. But I went into the menu and turned off IS and all of a sudden my images were nice and sharp. The lens didn't detect my camera was on a tripod
The Sony 16-70 f4 was my favorite for a long time. The image was quite crisp 👌 Was considering switching to a Fuji system. I might consider this combination
I had both (sold the 18-55). The sharpness of the 18-55 is unmatched by the 16-80, and also weighs a bit more. It's quite hefty overall, the volume is what is much bigger. But the target of a kit lens like this makes it a no-brainer. When you go for a hike with only one lens you want to have this one instead of the 18-5, trust me. Wide Landscapes ? boom 16 mm right there. You spot a bear? The bear will kill you and eat you whole together with the 18-55.. The 80m reach on the 16-80 might just save your life.
Also, the video is superb with this lens. Fantastic for video! Not that the 18-55 had any issues or anything, but the IS on this one makes you able to catch great footage just by supporting the camera with the neck strap a breeze.
Addsy the 16-80 is a bit softer overall. But it has many other advantages, like the range and the weather sealing and the better IS. It is larger though..
Jordan, did you try to zoom while recoding video? It goes quite crazy with focus and shifting exposure like if it was flickering. I think this is one of Fuji's first bad creations and we must acknowledge it. Specially when it is 800 euros where we have lenses like the Tamron 28-75 for Sony, full frame, the 18-105 for Sony apsc, or the Olympus 12-40 and 12-100 pro lenses. This lens is just a highly overpriced average lens.
@@Lurreable Well that depends on your shooting style and situations. You get longer reach but less light gathering. Also slightly less wide angle of view. Still I find these lenses expensive because they don't give you crazy massive reach and they are average optically. I think that 500 $ would be the fair price, but 800$ is crazy.
Sorry to geek out but sometimes a flat wall isn't the best test for corner sharpness. Not saying your test results were incorrect but the method may lead to inconsistant results. The distance from the framed center of the wall to the lens is shorter than the distance from the framed edges of the wall to the lens. The farther you are from that wall when taking the test shot, the larger the difference will be. As long as the distance difference falls within the lens' depth of field (which also increases in range the farther you are from the subject) at the given focal length then the edges will be in focus & the test will be accurate. Even at f/4 and applying a crop factor, the edges still have a high chance of being out of focus when focusing at the center. To make things easy & test the edges without any calculation, simply focus on the edges to test edge sharpness & focus on center for center sharpness.
Which is exactly what we do. Although we keep the frame the same we focus right to the top corner and edge of frame when doing our corner sharpness test.
Just came back from a carribean cruise with mainly shooting this lens. Got to say I’m a little disappointed by its image quality especially at the corners at the long end. Oh well it’s still a great travel lens but by no mean a pro glass...
Hadn’t noticed the softness in edge and would a non photographic eye when printed? I purchased this over the other kit lens for that extra added reach. I’m happy with it and not sure if I would notice the difference. When purchased with Fuji body I saved $400!
Can someone at DPR please explain to Chris the difference between 'dampened' and 'damped.' Are the focus and aperture rings well damped, or are they pleasantly moist?
I mostly use my Fuji cameras for photos so I think I will stick with the 18-55 which is one of my favorite kit lenses of all time. Thanks for the video guys. Cheers.
Kind of a prime guy, not a super-zoom type. I've been using this lens for a week now and it makes it's way onto my xt-30 and awful lot. It's a great dog walking lens. I've even taken it out in nighttime street photography where I would normally take f1.4 or f2 fujicrons and it's great. The OIS is pretty incredible and I have a bunch of great shots handheld at f4 and 1/8 sec that are sharp even when pixel-peeping. (this is doubly impressive given how much coffee I drink). it's a bit big on the x-pro3 but meh, that's what the EVF is for.
Thanks again. This is the lens I bought with my X-T5. Would you recommend this lens for shooting my granddaughters wedding? Once again, thanks for the great reviews.
Hmmmm. I was debating getting this over a used 18-55 and I think I'm still glad I decided to stick with the 18-55, especially since it's just for a backup/secondary camera. I definitely would prefer to have the bigger focal range though, but it's just not a deal-breaker for me (the more limited 18-55).
I was choosing between this and 16-55 for my X-T3. I figured I wanted better sharpness and f 2.8 over a longer focal range and IS. I am happy! I also don't think that 200g extra weight is that much when you consider the camera + lens weight combined.
I am expecting more out of a Fuji lens, it is after all an XF type not the cheaper type, and besides they are known for good glass. I was considering this lens because it is such a great versatile zoom, now, I am really going to re-think it. I have lots of their lenses and they are almost universally really good, and even the ones that are less good, are still good lenses. But here we have the XF version, weather sealed, and really I was hoping for better performance. Thanks for the review, have heard similar corner softness reports elsewhere as well. Best wishes!
I hated this lens and ultimately returned it. I found it was fine for objects near at hand that did not require corner sharpness and the OIS was actually quite good. But my copy was terrible focused at infinity/distant objects and just not sharp at all at any focal length, even at the center. Photos of distant buildings or big landscapes, for example, all were a bit fuzzy when zoomed in. I also didn't think the firmware fixed the "shutter shock" issue with the mechanical shutter. For me, as a Fuji user, this is a base hit that could have been a triple. Oh well.
With which lense do you compare the 16 80? It's a zoom, like a 24 105 ff, it can't be super sharp everywhere , that's a downside of a zoom. But the benefits are real too
@@Freestyler913 A travel camera that can't focus on infinity is not a travel camera. In terms of comparisons, I'd say it is worse than the Nikon 24-120 f/4 at all focal lengths, and substantially worse than a used Fuji 16-55 f/2.8, which is sharp through the range. It's worse than the 55-200 as well. It's dogshit.
@@matthewwells1606 Wow, I can feel your frustration; didn't expect that the 16 - 55 2.8 is worse than the 24 120 ; what's is your gear now ? you gave up with fuji ?
I don’t know, but it seems Fuji with every new lens release lately, seems to be compromising more and more on optical quality. The onion ring bokeh, but especially the quite severe corner softness throughout much of the range, is very disappointing. And this lens isn’t cheap! Should be better for the money.
Ok.... this is what we should do.... Take one deep breath in , and 2 Big steps back. Aw.... see? From hear, Whilst holding our breath, Alas, it is an image taken with a Fuji lens. Not sterile and sharp, other than where it Surgically needs to be . Allowing us to see that we are viewing an artist composed image, and Not a 1 to 1 Anatomical view of reality, that we can see everyday, with our own eyes.
That's true and also if you look at how much artificial correction the camera body does or fuji software when you import raw photos you realise that the distortion is on par with lenses that are twice as cheap. I did notice that fuji has a lot of fanboys which is not very good for any kind of conversation but thankfully this you can actually measure and it's quite awful-for that price.
I’m not a Fuji fan boy but do like the English language. “Twice as cheap?” That doesn’t even make sense. Did you mean, “half the price?” You will never get photons to line up perfectly the way you want when you shoot them through 16 pieces of glass on a zoom lens. Zoom lenses today are built using computerized logarithmic tables and lasers. They’re actually pretty damn good compared to not that long ago, but they will never replace a prime with a handful of elements. You buy a zoom at this price range for convenience; and you buy $1500 zooms for weight lifting exercise. I’m a prime lens guy. I got the 16-80mm as my only zoom just to say I have one, it was a deal packages with my new T4 and will go on my T3 so I have an excuse to keep it. I think it’s pretty good for what it is and what I use it for. The only dog in Fuji’s lineup is probably the 18mm and that’s still better than a Nikkor or Canon or Zuiko of a few decades ago. Do people ever tell you that you’re crabby?
Lau Bjerno yeah i agree as it is its similar in price to there premium red label lens the 16-55mm f/2.8. I guess your paying for a lighter lens and ois which can help.
How this lens and XT4 would be for everyday use and for Streetphotography ? I’m from India 🇮🇳 and it’s very Hot, humid and dusty almost all through the time . Need your advice 🙏
Did Jordan even try this lens for video? It has TONS of issues in that department… 1. Bizarre focus wobbling phenomenon when zooming 2. OIS is clunky and fights against you when panning, tilting, or walking. Only works well for static shots. Even after the 1.05 FW update, it’s still not good. 3. Camera abruptly switches distortion correction profiles when you zoom 4. Exposure flickering during video
The color and out of focus rendering on the S1-H knocked my socks off but there was something missing. I vote that you only shoot anamorphic lenses and incorporate the Michael Bay spin at the precise moment you tell Chris he'll be shooting another 35mm lens review. MORE DRAMA!
People have been complaining about shutter-shock issues with this lens (at around 1/160th), did you see this? Also Fuji appear to be suggesting this was improved in firmware 1.02, which firmware were you using? Oh and Jordan - glad to see the lens adds IBIS to the XT3 (@3:07)... ;-)
Guys, no comments about the focus flickring while zooming on video mode? I was a bit desapoited with that aspect and you guys didnt even show that on the video part of the review
I've really grown to love the 16-55 for a good all around lens, but the lack of OIS has made relegated it to good decent to good lighting only for me. Sure, I can pull off of some low-light hand held shots if I use burst mode or find some other way to anchor myself. Usually. And after months using it, I've gotten a bit tired of usually. Otherwise, IQ and sharpness are top notch!
The 16-55mm is a heavy lens and fat and with no ois but if u dont care about that and more about the best image quality then yeah the 16-55 is way better i think
I’ve read the IS goes off automatically when it senses no movement as on a tripod or your draw for that matter. But by now I’m sure you’ve heard this a dozen times.
My pros and cons for this lens (I have it) ++++++Pros: Fast autofocus. Slient. Ois is great. Focal length is fantastic. Versatile hybrid for photos and video. Its nice size and light, makes camera look ‘cool’. -----Cons: F/4 is is pretty eh i wish i could let in more light but means i have to raise iso in some instances which creates noise. It has a focus wobble when zooming though out focal length see pal2tech video about this. Focus distance is 35cm its ok not the best. It dosnt have the best corner sharpness throughout the apertures but can be fixed in post. Expensive! When for $200 more u can buy the 16-55mm f2.8 but no ois on lens. Conclusion: for the causal shooter its fine but for someone professional or experienced it may not be the best choice.
Many options to consider with lenses. I shoot with a XS with IBIS so the f4 is not a high concern for me. The focal length of 55 vs. 80 is an issue for me so a second lens will be required to cover that focal range deficiency. If absolute resolution is the highest priority then it appears the 16-55 would be a better choice. I have seen over 50 of images shot with the 16-80 by professionals who whole heartedly endorse the 16-80 lens and I believe my eyes. If one is really focused on both quality and focal length then perhaps a prime lens would be a better choice. As they say “There is no such thing as a perfect lens “ and IMO when shooting with a zoom vs a prime you are basically assessing what level of compromise is acceptable on the image quality issue. From what I have learned from others is that the 16-55 and the 16-80 are both fine zoom lenses.
Angry P gave this a 10 out of 10. I got one, and yea fooled once again, lol. It's no 16-55mm. Weird that it's the Kit lens on the 40mp X-H2. For general purposes or video, it's great.
Its more so because of the incredible rarity of consumer lenses to be parfocal. Generally that is something reserved for quite specialized and expensive lenses. It's a good point though to mention that this lens is not parfocal.
@@niccollsvideo I'm glad you replied. This is a $1000 lense, though it come with a kit it's not a cheap one. Fuji should regard video capabilities more seriously IMO. Whatever a brilliant review as always.
What this review fails to mention, and many others, is that this 16-80 has a MAJOR flaw for video due to the focus "wobble" when recording and zooming in or out.. even the half price 18-55 doesn't have this issue. shame on Fuji and shame on many reviews out there who don't mention this.
Looks like a great lens. I'm not ready to move up or down to it from the 16-55 or 18-55 do to the price. Thanks for the great information regarding stills and video.
I have yet to be distracted by onions rings unless they’re cold and soggy. I had to look closely after having my attention drawn and didn’t notice much of anything. I’m not a zoom kinda guy. I’m a one-camera-one-lens guy who only owns 4 cameras and 7 primes. I got the 16-80mm lens with my T4 because it’s a deal as a package and it will make my T3 more versatile and less likely to collect dust now that I have IBIS on another body. I know it’s an inanimate object but we’ve become friends and I wasn’t comfortable selling the T3 because I got a new body. That’s what my Ex did and I remember it didn’t feel good. Too many Walt Disney movies as a kid. Trash talk my Mini Cooper and you’re in deep shit.
Great content. As a beginner, I am now decided to get this kit lens to be paired with my first camera (x-t4). What would you suggest as my second lens. I am more interested with street photography and family portrait. TIA.
I’m new to Fuji, I would say I’m a hybrid shooter so I like what I see overall but if I can only buy one do I go with this, the kit 18-55 or the 18-135. They are all at a very similar price point but I could probably get the 18-55 for about $400 used...
Does this lens have some kind of "lock mechanism" that prevents it from collapsing while walking around with the camera attached to a peak design clip?
I have the samyang 12mm f2, the 55-100mm f3.5-4.8, and the 18-55mm f2.8-4. I was thinking about selling the 18-55 for this one, what do you think? I think I would like the extra mm, but the softness is something I don't want to because I'll use this when travelling and it is mostly point and shoot in aperture mode
I’m pre ordering the new X-S10 and am really in doubt between the 18-55 and the 16-80. Which one produces sharper images and which one would you recommend?
If you set the focus point near to the corner, is it still soft? Or is it sharp? It is rather clear such an extreme zoom is not made for architectural photo and there is probably some curvature of field, but this would not matter too much for the intended purpose of this lens.